Consumers commit a large amount of their disposable income and available time to improving or maintaining their health and appearance through proper exercise and diet. It has been reported by the National Sporting Goods Association that Americans alone spend billions of dollars annually on sporting and exercise equipment. See NSGA Analysis: Sporting Goods Store Sales in New England Grew 22.5% from 1997 to 2002; Sporting Goods Sales Reach $52.1 Billion in 2006; NSGA Expects 3% Growth in 2007. Health club memberships among Americans number in the tens of millions. See The American Fitness Industry's Plan for Growth: 50 Million Members by 2010. Americans spend billions of dollars annually on diet plans and products AARP.
Difficulties often arise in tracking the progress that an individual achieves through exercise and diet. Perhaps the most common barometer for determining progress is weight loss. Many people correlate the successfulness of a diet and weight loss program proportionally to their overall weight loss. However, many exercise programs today encourage muscular development in conjunction with fat loss for achieving better fitness and longevity. Straight calculations of weight loss do not factor in muscle weight gains. Conventional scales only indicate total weight change of the entire body, and do not account for the composition of that weight, i.e., how much is fat and how much is muscle. Thus, for example, a person who sheds 10 pounds of fat while gaining 2 pounds of muscle will only decipher from a conventional scale the loss of 8 pounds overall. The building of desirable muscle mass can distort the perceived effectiveness of a dieting and exercise program evaluated solely on the basis of weight loss.
Another problem associated with using weight loss as the primary benchmark for setting exercise and diet routine goals is that the individual, while having an ideal body shape and appearance pictured in their head, will not always be able to predict accurately what target weight loss is required to attain their ideal body shape and appearance. The individual may reach a target weight loss through their exercise and diet routine only to find, for example, that their target weight was not realistically low enough to allow them to fit into a particular size dress.
Another touchstone by which exercise and dieting programs are evaluated involves the periodic measurement of body part circumferences by the individual over the course of the program. An individual may measure and record the circumference of their buttocks or waist at the beginning of a program, and thereafter make additional periodic measurements over the course of the program, such as on a weekly basis, to track and evaluate progress. Successful completion of an exercise and dieting program or a phase thereof is signified when the individual reaches a target or goal body circumferential measurement.
The use of body measurements for evaluating a program's effectiveness is not without its problems. For one, the accuracy of this procedure depends greatly on measurement repeatability. The measuring device must be placed at an identical location on the body part each time the measurement is repeated. Because body parts possess curvatures and taper, if a measurement device is placed on an individual's body part, such as a thigh, at a location higher or lower than the placement for a previous periodic measurement of the same body part, the difference in recorded measurements may not reflect an accurate and precise comparison for reliably evaluating progress over the dieting and exercise period.
Still another problem of tracking progress by body measurement is that individuals usually fixate on a single body part and focus their attention only on that body part. Although fat loss occurs generally proportionally throughout the body as weight is lost, for certain individuals fat deposited, for example, at the thighs and waist often may be the “last to go.” See Scientific Psychic, Weight Control. Hence, an individual may become frustrated because, for example, diminutive waistline losses might not fully reflect greater overall weight loss more pronounced in other body areas, such as the thighs. Additionally, individuals are often not able to predict quantitatively what body part measurements are required in order to reach their desired body appearance and shape. Consequently, the individual may set a target goal body part measurement that is either insufficient or excessive for attaining an ideal body shape and image desired by the individual. Hence, accurate and repeatable body measurement routines are extremely valuable for tracking health and fitness progress and evaluating the effectiveness of an exercise or dieting program.
Additionally, the accurate and repeatable measurement routines can provide advantages to individuals in their selection and purchase of properly fitting garments.
Traditionally, consumers made a majority of their clothing and fitness garments purchases at retail outlets, such as department stores and specialty stores. Commonly, the consumer travels to one or more stores and visually inspects the stores' merchandise to select those products that meet his or her preferences. The retailer typically furnishes changing rooms and mirrors on their premises so that the consumer may try on and model the clothing so as to assess the fit and appearance of the clothing before making a purchasing decision. The retailer may also offer in-store consultants for providing advice on appearance and fit, and tailors for making custom alterations. One advantage of traditional in-store retail sales has been the opportunity for the consumer to try on multiple size garments and select which size fits best. Although the process is time consuming, it saves the consumer the inconvenience of returning garments which, when tried on at home for the first time, do not properly fit.
Most garments are made available to consumers for purchase in ready-to-wear stock sizes. Consumers typically estimate their garment size, and then proceed through a trial-and-error process of trying on garments of different sizes close to their estimated size until arriving at a size that fits best. This trial-and-error process permits “normal size” consumers to obtain garments that overall fit well enough to wear comfortably and fashionably. Depending upon eccentricities in the body of the consumer, however, for many consumers a garment may properly fit one body part while improperly fitting another body part. For example, traditional dress shirts such as used for men's business attire are often available by neck size and arm length. However, discrepancies in shoulder broadness and girth, even between individuals sharing common neck sizes and sleeve lengths, can result in the shirt properly fitting one individual and improperly fitting another individual of different girth.
Proper fitting of currently available stock sized garments often presents additional problems. Although most manufacturers adopt standard numbered sizes or more indefinite designations such as small, medium, large, etc., there can be wide discrepancies in the actual measurements of a garment produced by one manufacturer when compared to that of another due to lack of size uniformity throughout the industry. As a result, consumers frequently find that although a certain size of garment produced by one manufacturer fits them, the same size garments made from another manufacturer does not fit.
Manufacturers have contributed to this problem by frequently introducing under a single label or brand different lines of clothing aimed at different classes of shoppers, such as younger individuals versus older individuals or those of smaller or larger stature as compared to those of so-called normal stature. Although manufacturers retain traditional size designations such as medium, etc. for each clothing line, the garments so designated from one line are dimensioned and fit differently than those from another line. Manufacturers routinely offer little or no guidance to the consumer as to these differences other than occasional use of somewhat vague terms such as sport, athletic, junior or petite to indicate sizing trends of the product line. It is not uncommon, therefore, for consumers to be somewhat perplexed or exasperated as they find that a garment from a particular manufacturer that bears “their” size does not fit actually them, only then to be told by a salesperson that despite the common size designations of the garments, the non-fitting garment is from a particular line of that manufacturer that runs bigger or smaller.
With the advent and proliferation of the Internet (i.e., the World Wide Web), many manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers have diversified their sales approach by selling “online.” The consumer uses his or her online connection and web browser to view the product line of a particular retail store or garment manufacturer, and to purchase a garment or garments over the Internet. Some websites assist the consumer in visualizing the fit and appearance of a particular garment by providing a digital photograph of a model wearing the garment. Alternatively, the consumer may view the garments in mail order catalogues before placing their orders online.
Online sales provide the consumer with several benefits over traditional in-store shopping. The online consumer is able to access clothing not offered by retailers within the consumer's geographical proximity. For example, online shopping permits the consumer to make international purchases of garments that otherwise might not be imported into the consumer's country or state. Another benefit of online shopping is efficiency. The consumer may scan various brands and styles online without physically traveling to a retailer store or searching through shelves of clothing for a correct style and size. Further, the in-store consumer is restricted to perusing and purchasing from the limited stock of a retail store. Sales are often thwarted because a garment desired by the consumer is not available in stock in the consumer's size. In contrast, online purchases are typically shipped from warehouses having larger stocking capacities than brick and mortar retail stores. With the exception of special orders, online orders generally ship the same or next day the order is placed and payment is made. The consumer is not the only one to benefit from online sales. An online garment retailer benefits from online sales by reaching a wider audience of potential customers than would otherwise be available due to the geographical constraints and other drawbacks of the traditional approach.
One of the more rigorous and deleterious problems experienced by online sellers resides in the transaction costs of consumer returns. Perhaps the most prominent reason for consumer returns stems from improper fit. Many objective and subjective considerations play into whether a garment fits properly, including perceived tightness, length, and comfort. Unlike the traditional approach, in which the consumer is able to physically try on multiple sizes of garments in a brick-and-mortar store for fit evaluation, online sales largely rely on the consumer's estimation of size choice based on perceptions that the consumer has over his or her own body and expectations concerning actual garment sizes. For example, the consumer may predict the appropriate size fit of a garment purchase by referring to clothing sizes in their existing wardrobes. However, consumers often have misperceptions of their own body shape and dimensions when ordering cloths. Further, as discussed above there are generally differences in garment cuts between brands, leading to a lack of a consensus among manufacturers in sizing garments. This lack of consensus is due, at least in part, to so-called vanity selling. Some companies conclude that if they put, for example, a size 4 on a label, even though the garment is closer to a true size 6, the consumer will be more likely to purchase the garment labeled with the smaller size. Furthermore, consumers often experience weight changes and growth spurts, particularly in the case of younger consumers, that cause the consumer to change sizes between purchases.
Consequently, the consumer will not get a true indication of the fit of the garment until the purchased garment has been received and tried on, usually at home, by the consumer. In instances in which the fit is not to the consumer's satisfaction, the consumer repackages the garment and ships it back to the online seller for either a refund or exchange. Returns and exchanges of online product sales cost the clothing industry millions of dollars annually. Contributing to diminished profits of online sales are shipping costs, restocking expenses, damage to returned garments, and overall dissatisfaction cost that could impact the continuing success of the brand in general.
Another problem arising from Internet ordering of standard stock-sized garments is that many Internet shoppers are only willing to consider purchasing garments over the Internet from manufacturers or manufacturers' product lines that they already own, neglecting to consider either other manufacturers or product lines. This consumer behavior presupposes that a given manufacturer does not change the cut or sizing of its garments in general or of a particular product line, which frequently is not the case.
The verbiage and charts frequently offered on web sites to help a consumer determine the appropriate size to purchase often have no positive effect. Consumers lacking tailoring experience and tools usually do not bother to go through the steps of taking complete and accurate measurements before they make a purchase of clothing, or they are confused or daunted by the task of deciphering the directions to determine their size.
At a minimum, these problems associated with Internet clothing shopping can result in increased frustration and wasted time and expense as a consumer has to send purchases back one or more times to the vendor in favor of a different size until this trial and error process hopefully results in an appropriately fitting garment. This process may lead a frustrated consumer, who might have been a loyal customer of a given brand, to either no longer shop for clothing via the Internet or no longer continue purchasing a particular manufacturer's garments.
Current fashion trends further exacerbate the problems associated with so-called stock-size garment purchases. The look, style and fit trends of clothing are ever changing. Fashion trends have caused clothing styles to run the gamut from extremely oversized garments to virtually skin-tight form-fitting garments. Some fashion trends might dictate a tight fit in one area of a garment and a loose fit in another. These fashion trends have made sizing designations further unreliable. For example, a consumer may desire high or low rise for a pair of pants or jeans to accomplish a given style or look. This can cause the waistband of the garment, for example, to ride across or very low on the hips in one instance and above or very high on the hips in another instance. Similarly, the shopper of such garments may desire the crotch of the garment to very closely follow the contour of the body or provide a considerable space of up to several inches between the wearer's crotch and the location of the crotch on the garment. These trends have rendered many traditional garment measurements, such as the inseam measurements, relatively useless because these measurements depend upon the height or location of the waistband on the wearer and the location of the rise. Traditional inseam measurements virtually never represent a standard measurement that is of any use in crafting such varied custom fashion clothing. To a lesser extent, the reliability of crotch, outer seam and length measurements has also been lessened by these trends because the measurements depend completely upon the desired location of the waistband in relation to the wearer's hips.
The search for the right stock size can be exhausting and frustrating, and often in vain because an acceptable stock size fit simply might not exist for a certain end user. In order to overcome the problems associated with stock-sized garments, consumers who are more discerning about their clothing and clothing fit or have unusual requirements in this regard have at times rejected stock-sized garments in favor of custom-made garments. A major benefit of custom-made garments is the ability to have them tailored to complement the particular body size and shape of the individual. However, custom garments are typically much more expensive than standard or ready-to-wear garments and usually require an extended time period for production of the garment. The extra expense of custom garments stems in part from the fact that production of such garments requires the time and expertise of a skilled tailor, working with a tape measure, to accurately measure the person for whom the garment is being customized. In addition to the expense, a consumer who chooses the custom garment resigns himself to the fact that he or she can not accomplish the process himself from home via the Internet and will need to make one or more trips to a tailor to complete the measuring process alone. In return for the additional time and expense invested for the custom-made garment, the consumer commonly expects precise fit and pleasing comfort in the tailored clothing. It is, therefore, imperative that the tailor have adequate tools to take precise measurements and to fit the consumer with a garment that meets the consumer's expectations.
Generally, a tailor begins a custom tailoring process by measuring his or her customer to determine various body dimensions for use in production of the custom garment. Typically, this measurement process is performed with a standard measuring tape, which the tailor applies along and around various body parts of the individual. Tailors usually work from certain “standard measurements” such as chest, waist, hip and inseam measurements. These so-called standard measurements, however, are rendered meaningless if the wearer intends to wear the clothing in a non-traditional manner, for example, if the wearer intends to locate the waistband of the finished garment at a point other than where the tailor has taken his traditional waist measurement. Errors in judgment of waistband location by the tailor or consumer during the measurement process are reflected in the fit of the tailored garment when the consumer tries on the pants but places the waistband at a different height than originally estimated using the tape measure. Such judgment errors, whether attributable to the consumer or tailor, cause the tailor to bear the additional time and expense of altering the garment or may even require the garment to be remade. Alteration and start-over delays serve to increase expense and consumer frustration.
A further problem associated with tailoring using a conventional measuring tape is that the tailoring process involves taking multiple measurements that are interrelated with one another. For example, when measuring for the waistband for a pair of pants, the height on the customer's waist at which the measuring tape is placed will directly affect pants length and crotch measurements, which typically start at the waistband. It is therefore important that pants leg measurement start from the same location where the waistband measurement was taken and not from some standard waist measurement location not coinciding to the actual waistband level.